Re: [Patch v3] firmware: dmi-sysfs: add SMBIOS entry point area raw attribute

[Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>]

On 02/03/2015 12:49 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan, at 05:56:25PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c b/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
>>> index e0f1cb3..61b6a38 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
>>> @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@
>>>   #define MAX_ENTRY_TYPE 255 /* Most of these aren't used, but we consider
>>>   			      the top entry type is only 8 bits */
>>> +static const u8 *smbios_raw_header;
> There appears to be a mixture of u8 and unsigned char going on here, cf.
> 'smbios_header'.
>
> While I'm pretty sure all architectures typedef them to be equivalent,
> semantically, as a reviewer this makes me think there are type issues.
>
> Is there any way to use one data type for the SMBIOS header?

Let it be u8 in both cases.

>>> @@ -669,6 +699,18 @@ static int __init dmi_sysfs_init(void)
>>>   		goto err;
>>>   	}
>>> +	smbios_raw_header = dmi_get_smbios_entry_area(&size);
>>> +	if (!smbios_raw_header) {
>>> +		pr_debug("dmi-sysfs: SMBIOS raw data is not available.\n");
>>> +		error = -ENODATA;
>>> +		goto err;
> Perhaps this should be -EINVAL? -ENODATA implies that if you try again
> in the future data might be available, i.e. it's a temporary failure.
> That's not the case here since the header is invalid.
>

Yes, -EINVAL is better.
I'll send new patch soon.
Thanks!